Friday, April 03, 2009

Could the MI Senate Republican Stimulus Vote Lead to the Liberal Subversion of America?

Yes, it's a facetious title... or is it? Wrap your minds around this one. Our Senate approved $1.9B in stimulus funding for education, health care, energy efficiency, and law enforcement by the score of 36-1 yesterday. Tom George and Alan Cropsey provide a glimpse of the mental gymnastics that the Republicans need to apply before they can get past the chip in their brain that is programmed to say "no" to everything that might do us some good, so they somehow simultaneously argue that Michigan should get more stimulus funding, we shouldn't have had a stimulus in the first place, and even though we are getting this funding that we shouldn't get but yet need more of, by golly they will watch and make sure that it isn't going to go to extremist liberal groups that will use it to "subvert our way of life". Try and follow along.

Tom George argues that since we have lost the most jobs overall, we should get the 20% of the entire $787B package. They won't vote for equality in staffing for their own Chamber, but they will complain that Levin and Stabenow failed when they couldn't somehow convince Congress to give Michigan one-fifth of the entire pie.

The Governor has said that Michigan will have lost 750,000 jobs by the end of 2010. The country as a whole will have lost 4 million. So we account for about 20 percent of the jobs lost nationwide. If the stimulus package was really directed at the source of the problem, we would be getting 20 percent of the package. That would be eight times more then we are actually receiving. Consider the response to Hurricane Katrina. The levee repair was focused on where the problem was—the Gulf Region. It wasn’t spread around the country. There was no levee repair in the Great Lakes.

You’ll recall that in February we passed Senate Resolution No. 6, where we asked our state’s federal delegation to try and link the stimulus package to the unemployment rates of the states, which would have given us our fair share. But did that happen? No. Either our U.S. Senators didn’t hear us, or they were simply unsuccessful in getting our state it’s fair share.

George went on to disapprove of where some of this money is going; terrible, horrible things like preventing pollution, senior citizen nutrition, arts and culture grants (which he fought to add back into our state budget), stopping domestic violence, school lunch equipment, anti-drug initiatives and weatherization programs. Ignoring all the jobs that those items would create, George sums this up by saying: Michigan didn't get enough money, and we are spending it all wrong anyway. But he will vote "yes".

Cropsey takes this one further. He agrees "wholeheartedly" with George, alerts us to the "red menace" contained in the package, and then does a 180 about passing the spending in the first place. So, which is it Alan: More spending or no spending?

I agree wholeheartedly with the previous Senator from the 20th District. One of the things for which I have had a major concern is if this stimulus package goes through, was to make sure that it really goes to people who are really in need or that it stimulates the economy. There was an amendment that was put on that said that this was not supposed to be used for political organizing. There is also a good amendment on transparency on this. Now, if for some reason the administration seems to funnel money to ACORN or to the Triangle Foundation or any one of the other extreme liberal organizations that I believe are trying to, in many cases, subvert our election process and subvert our way of life here, it should come to this body’s attention. It should come to the attention to the people of the state of Michigan.

With that in mind, I will be voting for this. Just because I am voting for this bill does not mean that I think it has been good policy on what Washington, D.C., has done. We are put in an interesting situation of having $1 trillion go onto our debt that our children and grandchildren will be paying for. The question becomes does Michigan, because Congress is foisting this upon us and foisting this debt upon us, then say no we are not going to be taking the money that we are going to be paying for? So we really have no choice.

Yes, Cropsey has "no choice" but to vote for bad policy, and he will be having nightmares about the secret plan to fund gay members of ACORN so they can roll around in piles of hundred dollar bills and make your grandchildren pay for it. That, my friends, is Republican paranoia in all its glory, worth its weight in stimulus gold. Added liberal bonus: If Republicans want to continue to claim that the stimulus is going to lead to "higher taxes", well, the Senate Republicans just voted for a tax increase, too. Ha ha.

By the way, Bruce Patterson was the single "no" vote, citing both the George and Cropsey statements as his reason why. Guess you can't force him to join the liberal agenda of education, law enforcement, energy efficiency and health care, and all the job creation that comes with it. Way to man up there, Senator Patterson!